I don't see the bashing of Brosnan. The reviewer basically says that he was disappointed by "Die Another Day," which many people were, and that after seeing Craig in the role as 007, he can't go back to watching the previous three Bond films. He doesn't say that Brosnan is a crappy actor or that he doesn't look tough or that he gets by in what is mediocre entertainment simply because of his looks. If anything, he says that by comparison the Brosnan films now seem campy, something even some of my students predicted would be the case a month ago. Just because someone doesn't like the Brosnan films doesn't mean they're bashing Brosnan personally.
hmm kinda wish I hadnt read that cuz Im beginning to know too much about this movie weeks before it even comes out
but! if its true a large number of "Fans" wont bother to see it cuz they dont approve of the new direction, then I should have no problem getting a really good seat on opening night, so boycott away
Im glad theyre finally doing another Bondfilm for people like me
whats wrong with a ratio of say three movies with big explosions and comedy routines, then one movie that pays homage to Fleming?
You might not want to read ANY reviews of CR then, HG, I imagine most will reference Brosnan's protrayal, and not flatteringly. It's the comparison thing, reviewers will go there just like the tabloids did: because Craig is different.
NightshooterIn bed with SolitairePosts: 2,917MI6 Agent
HG... you still haven't seen the movie, none of us have. As we've all been saying, let us make judgements when we seem the film. Try to enjoy it, dont go into the theater knowing you'll hate it.
superadoRegent's Park West (CaliforniaPosts: 2,656MI6 Agent
Was this the only guy to have watched this "surprise" sneak preview? Did this screening really take place? I suppose if you write something that people want to hear, people will swallow it.
"...the purposeful slant of his striding figure looked dangerous, as if he was making quickly for something bad that was happening further down the street." -SMERSH on 007 dossier photo, Ch. 6 FRWL.....
I'm pretty sure it's the same screening from the AICN review, that guy thought he was seeing something called "Alcazar" too. May not be true, but it fits.
Wait a minute, did you just admit the general public actually WANTS to hear a good review of CR? Turn my page and call me Harry Potter and the Magical Something-or-other. )
... some people who enjoyed TND, TWINE and DAD might take offense to the reviewer's assetion that "the last few film (sic) have been GODAWFUL".
Then don't talk crap about Dalton.
LoeffelholzThe United States, With LovePosts: 8,998Quartermasters
I agree with the reviewer's "toy car on a string" point. B-)
Check out my Amazon author page!Mark Loeffelholz
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
Praise Craggy and CR as much as you like but just layoff PB and his 4 movies. Thanks )
To me it didn't look like he really was having such a pop at Brosnan. And why cannot a reviewer compare this movie to the most recent ones anyway? Is this not allowed?
And last not least DAD was no Batman & Robins and this is no Batman Begins. BB still followed the basic Batman formula. It was much more conservative and they switched off the neon lights but the essence remained the same; I frankly cant say the same for CR. BB was not a real reboot(Bale looks like Batman, batman has all his toys, his super-car, a super villian to take on and in the process save the City too). No wonder someone questioned the IQ level of the plant err reviewer. )
This is a matter of opinion. To me DAD is an an asbolute parallel to Batman & Robin, and I know that I'm not alone here in thinking this. In fact, this is an insult to Batman & Robin, which also was godawful. BB certainly was nothing like any of the previous Batman films. It may have had a man dressed as a bat and a villain with a mask, but there it ends. No silly jokes, no emphasise on giving the villain's more screen-time for daft one-liners. Instead, we got a down-to-earth, almost believable storyline, where you actually believed this could happen. I am a massive fan of the comics, and BB was a breath of fresh air after the trash that had been before.
Regarding CR, we still have the action scenes (check), spectacular stunts (check), bad villain (check), fast car (check), Fleming storyline (check), music and dancing girl titles (check), beautiful locations (check), beautiful girls (check), Bond in a tux in a casino (check).
So tell me where exactly CR is not following the basic Bond formula (other than lack of gadgets)?
Should point out that while Craig doesn't look like the cinematic Bond, esp recently eg round faced like Connery and Lazenby rather than long-faced or oval faced like Moore, Dalton and Brosnan if you catch my drift, he's not as far removed from Fleming's Bond as, say, Moore from TSWLM onwards where he's obv over 50 and looks nothing like the guy depicted on the old Pan novels...
Craig would be less of a culture shock than an ageing Moore would have been, and I liked Moore at the time.
Where is the Brosnan-bashing in this? He says how cool Brosnan, for heavens sake! He even pulls him out as the coolest of the Bonds so far! Talk about reading what you want to read...
Was this the only guy to have watched this "surprise" sneak preview? Did this screening really take place? I suppose if you write something that people want to hear, people will swallow it.
Or perhaps if you had read the thread you'd have seen the link from MBE with more reviews from the test screenings. And some of those were even negative, so I'm sure you'll find those easier to believe.
hem...seriously...if anyone thinks these kind of slanted reviews are going to win over PB fans or fans who paid money and as a result approved the last bond movies overwhelemingly than they are sadly very much mistaken.
I don't think it's meant to win over anyone. This is a review from this guy's point of view. Is he a plant? Well, if you want to believe that, but personally EON has absolutely nothing to gain by knocking their back catalogue - especially at a time when they're trying to punt it all on DVD. The Bond back catalogue makes a lot of money for the EON machine; deminishing that return by rubbishing their own films really is nonesensical.
I've liked every actor in the role of Bond so far, obviously not all equally, I have my preferences, but above all I'm a Bond fan. Not a Moore fan, not a Connery fan or a Brosnan fan - a Bond fan. Brosnan's tenure as Bond wasn't going to last forever, at some point he would have stepped down and another guy replace him. It was unfortunate how that all ended, but it certainly wasn't Daniel Craig's fault. If Brosnan was the limit of anyone's Bond world, then they would have picked up and left after he got off the stage anyway.
Praise Craggy and CR as much as you like but just layoff PB and his 4 movies. Thanks
It is a free world you know. You've demonstrated it by your show of hypocrisy in one sentence by bashing "Craggy". No one is silencing you from your opinions on Daniel Craig or Casino Royale, so don't expect anyone else to remain silent just because you might not like what they have to say.
And last not least DAD was no Batman & Robins and this is no Batman Begins. BB still followed the basic Batman formula. It was much more conservative and they switched off the neon lights but the essence remained the same; I frankly cant say the same for CR. BB was not a real reboot(Bale looks like Batman, batman has all his toys, his super-car, a super villian to take on and in the process save the City too).
Personally, I don't like the Batman comparisons at all. Full stop. However, you really have to accept that for many people Die Another Day was far too outlandish and reached the extremity of credibility in terms of its over-the-top technology. In saying that, I still think the Batman comparisons are well off the mark - the "reboot" to the Bond franchise isn't as severe as that done to Batman. (I should point out that for all it's failings, I still enjoy Die Another Day for what it is.)
Though I will disagree strongly with you're assertion that Casino Royale doesn't follow the basic Bond formula. As has been pointed out: exotic locations - check. Gorgeous girls - check. Thrilling espionage story - check. Glamourous cars - check. Menacing villians - check (one complete with a physical disfiguration). High octane action sequences - check. Gun battles - check. Titles sequence - check. Tux/casino/caviar/vodka/champagne - check. Really, what more do you want? The formula is actually very heavily in place, it's the execution of that formula that will be different to recent films (though those who have read the leaked script will know that it's not that far removed from the earlier films at all).
I cant wait for Nov 17th..someone will bound to get really hurt with regard to their feelings and B.O expectations for this movie. Among my friends and peers no one is really looking forward to CR..so good-luck... atleast in NA(perhaps)
I can't wait for November 17th either. Though not for such unpleasantly puerile, Machiavellian reasons. I can't wait for a new Bond film. It may be good, it may be bad, but it's Bond nonetheless. I'm a Bond fan, ergo I cannot wait for Bond.
I don't know why the Craig bashers can't just accept that there are going to be SOME people who enjoy this movie.
A positive review shouldn't be taken as the ramblings of a moron or an afront to the memory of Brosnan. The guy who wrote it just liked the movie. I'm still undecided on Craig but i might like it too, who knows until i see it?
I do think the Batman & Robin/DAD comparisons are going too far. Batman and Robin is so bad its virtually unwatchable. DAD does have some positive points.
On a final point, I don't think many of us would bash Brosnan as Bond, but alot of us think he was poorly served by the scripts on at least two of his movies (TND & DAD).
Impeccably said by the man with a laser in his nose cone. Like a hell of a lot of people, I've loved 20 very different Bond films that have been linked by a certain formula. And CR is different, yes, but I still see that formula present and correct in all I've been hearing. This time last year I was genuinely afraid that CR was going to dump on my years of fandom; the more I see of it, the more I feel confident, buoyed even.
Brosnan played Bond one way. Moore played it another. Dalton a different way. Same for Lazenby. And they were all trying to avoid comparisons with Connery. But they were all Bond. And they all made me smile. I have a very strong suspicion that Craig will do the same. Whatever happens it's Bond. James Bond.
Brosnan played Bond one way. Moore played it another. Dalton a different way. Same for Lazenby. And they were all trying to avoid comparisons with Connery. But they were all Bond. And they all made me smile. I have a very strong suspicion that Craig will do the same. Whatever happens it's Bond. James Bond.
I can genuinely agree with all this. Well said. I definately have my preferences, but no actor so far has been a complete disaster in the role, IMO. Not even Peter Sellers.
Praise Craggy and CR as much as you like but just layoff PB and his 4 movies. Thanks
Charming! I don't dislike any of the Bond actors but Brosnan was hardly the best actor out of the six and all four of his films have major script problems, regardless of how much entertainment one finds in them. Please note that I have typed this post wearing a critic's hat.
Just because the reviewer trashed the last few Bond movies does not necessarily mean he's NOT a plant. I don't know if he is or not, but part of what a plant does when they are deemed helpful is to sound like they were "converted" by the movie in question. In other words, they were just as skeptical as any of the doubters out there and they were surprised and blown away by the movie. This is much more effective than saying you're a Bond fan who loves the whole series. I'm not saying he's a plant, but I don't know that he isn't either.
Another thing is people keep referring to the London screening the AICN reviewer claimed to attend a couple weeks back. But this reviewer says he saw it LAST WEEKEND...so this is not the same screening. And there haven't been any other "leaked" reviews on AICN or anywhere else that review a recent screening. It strikes me as strange that there are not a couple other people who saw the same screening. Of course, the AICN was also not substantiated by anybody else.
I said in my first post, way back, that I wasn't surprised to hear a good review. That's because I love the script. Let me just repeat that: I love the script. I think Campbell and Craig would have to really try hard to screw up this movie. I fully expect it to be AT LEAST a "B+" movie. I was as depressed by DAD as anyone. Not because it was "over the top" - that doesn't bother me - but because it was just sloppy and had no flow or rhythm at all and was edited with a hatchet. It just didn't work. And that certainly was not Brosnan's fault.
Personally, I don't like it when anyone (non-Bond fans especially) trashes ANY of the Bond films. I didn't like it when Chris Cornell did it. It's like you can criticize your own family, but you don't want anyone else doing it.
I'm a Bond fan too, period, that's all. The first film I saw was OHMSS. So I didn't even start out with one of the real stars of the series. Dalton is my least favorite, but I don't hate him, I still enjoy those movies.
I look forward to CR. I'm not going to criticize, nor am I going to praise Craig, until I see him. I hope, I hope, I hope...
We're all too close to this thing to see it objectively.
Fair enough, Ben. And I suppose I did over-react by jumping to the gun as soon as I saw a back-lash of negativity again with a positive review (even if the guy writes like a 6 year old and could indeed be a plant).....;)
Personally, I don't like it when anyone (non-Bond fans especially) trashes ANY of the Bond films. I didn't like it when Chris Cornell did it. It's like you can criticize your own family, but you don't want anyone else doing it.
It's not really like that though, is it? They're just films... if someone has a go at your mum; fair enough, but if they say they didn't like GoldenEye... I just can't get upset about that. At a push if they call you defective for liking them, maybe, but he didn't even do that. They're just films which some people don't like. I'm managing to live with that.
As for this bloke being a plant; he could be, yes, but I see no reason to think he is. Or isn't, whichever point of view you prefer. If you're calling him a plant just because it's positive... well, that's just silly. And if it's because they aren't many other reviews on the net, well how many usually appear for test screenings on the net? I don't remember seeing much more than one on AICN or any of those sites for new movies: not many people actually write reviews on the net and very few people actually get into test screenings. The likelyhood of a high percentage of those being the kind of people who write net reviews is pretty low. That gossip monkey chap that MBE linked to said he'd spoken to a couple, so we know these test screenings are happening (unless he made it all up too! Who ya gonna trust?). It all seems pretty believable to me and if he is a plant, so what? All he's done is smoke out a couple of people who go looking to be offended whenever someone says the word 'Brosnan'.
It's a metaphor. Of course I didn't mean that my mom or anybody's mom is on the same level as "Goldeneye" for crissake. THAT'S silly.
It's a simile actually
But I was just extending it; why would you be upset because someone doesn't like something you do or vice versa? They're not passing judgement on you personally.
Also, I've been going to AICN since it started and these screening reviews usually appear in 2s and 3s, if not four or five at a time. Contrary to what you said, people who see movies before everyone else - especially big movies like the new James Bond - can't wait to get online and tell everyone, even if it's just a few lines. Basically anyone under 60 knows how to post online.
I don't really buy that, though. I used to get asked a lot to attend these things on the street and anyone's invited. Not just net film geeks. And most people really wouldn't go on the net and tell everyone. Maybe the AICN guys know where to hang out to catch the latest Hollywood screening, but there aren't that many huge films in the UK and I don't think you'd get that many people going online to blab about it; as that gossip monley link shows. Look how many people are on this website right now: 6. That's all. The web isn't where everyone goes.
Comments
So here's another
Roger Moore 1927-2017
but! if its true a large number of "Fans" wont bother to see it cuz they dont approve of the new direction, then I should have no problem getting a really good seat on opening night, so boycott away
Im glad theyre finally doing another Bondfilm for people like me
whats wrong with a ratio of say three movies with big explosions and comedy routines, then one movie that pays homage to Fleming?
Wait a minute, did you just admit the general public actually WANTS to hear a good review of CR?
Then don't talk crap about Dalton.
"I am not an entrant in the Shakespeare Stakes." - Ian Fleming
"Screw 'em." - Daniel Craig, The Best James Bond EverTM
To me it didn't look like he really was having such a pop at Brosnan. And why cannot a reviewer compare this movie to the most recent ones anyway? Is this not allowed?
This is a matter of opinion. To me DAD is an an asbolute parallel to Batman & Robin, and I know that I'm not alone here in thinking this. In fact, this is an insult to Batman & Robin, which also was godawful. BB certainly was nothing like any of the previous Batman films. It may have had a man dressed as a bat and a villain with a mask, but there it ends. No silly jokes, no emphasise on giving the villain's more screen-time for daft one-liners. Instead, we got a down-to-earth, almost believable storyline, where you actually believed this could happen. I am a massive fan of the comics, and BB was a breath of fresh air after the trash that had been before.
Regarding CR, we still have the action scenes (check), spectacular stunts (check), bad villain (check), fast car (check), Fleming storyline (check), music and dancing girl titles (check), beautiful locations (check), beautiful girls (check), Bond in a tux in a casino (check).
So tell me where exactly CR is not following the basic Bond formula (other than lack of gadgets)?
Craig would be less of a culture shock than an ageing Moore would have been, and I liked Moore at the time.
Roger Moore 1927-2017
Why? People are allowed not to like them, you know. I thought they were great, but it doesn't upset me to know that some didn't.
Where is the Brosnan-bashing in this? He says how cool Brosnan, for heavens sake! He even pulls him out as the coolest of the Bonds so far! Talk about reading what you want to read...
Or perhaps if you had read the thread you'd have seen the link from MBE with more reviews from the test screenings. And some of those were even negative, so I'm sure you'll find those easier to believe.
You must have me confused with someone else Klaus, I always said Dalton was a very good Bond, even if I don't care much for the tone of LTK.
I don't think it's meant to win over anyone. This is a review from this guy's point of view. Is he a plant? Well, if you want to believe that, but personally EON has absolutely nothing to gain by knocking their back catalogue - especially at a time when they're trying to punt it all on DVD. The Bond back catalogue makes a lot of money for the EON machine; deminishing that return by rubbishing their own films really is nonesensical.
I've liked every actor in the role of Bond so far, obviously not all equally, I have my preferences, but above all I'm a Bond fan. Not a Moore fan, not a Connery fan or a Brosnan fan - a Bond fan. Brosnan's tenure as Bond wasn't going to last forever, at some point he would have stepped down and another guy replace him. It was unfortunate how that all ended, but it certainly wasn't Daniel Craig's fault. If Brosnan was the limit of anyone's Bond world, then they would have picked up and left after he got off the stage anyway.
It is a free world you know. You've demonstrated it by your show of hypocrisy in one sentence by bashing "Craggy". No one is silencing you from your opinions on Daniel Craig or Casino Royale, so don't expect anyone else to remain silent just because you might not like what they have to say.
Personally, I don't like the Batman comparisons at all. Full stop. However, you really have to accept that for many people Die Another Day was far too outlandish and reached the extremity of credibility in terms of its over-the-top technology. In saying that, I still think the Batman comparisons are well off the mark - the "reboot" to the Bond franchise isn't as severe as that done to Batman. (I should point out that for all it's failings, I still enjoy Die Another Day for what it is.)
Though I will disagree strongly with you're assertion that Casino Royale doesn't follow the basic Bond formula. As has been pointed out: exotic locations - check. Gorgeous girls - check. Thrilling espionage story - check. Glamourous cars - check. Menacing villians - check (one complete with a physical disfiguration). High octane action sequences - check. Gun battles - check. Titles sequence - check. Tux/casino/caviar/vodka/champagne - check. Really, what more do you want? The formula is actually very heavily in place, it's the execution of that formula that will be different to recent films (though those who have read the leaked script will know that it's not that far removed from the earlier films at all).
I can't wait for November 17th either. Though not for such unpleasantly puerile, Machiavellian reasons. I can't wait for a new Bond film. It may be good, it may be bad, but it's Bond nonetheless. I'm a Bond fan, ergo I cannot wait for Bond.
A positive review shouldn't be taken as the ramblings of a moron or an afront to the memory of Brosnan. The guy who wrote it just liked the movie. I'm still undecided on Craig but i might like it too, who knows until i see it?
I do think the Batman & Robin/DAD comparisons are going too far. Batman and Robin is so bad its virtually unwatchable. DAD does have some positive points.
On a final point, I don't think many of us would bash Brosnan as Bond, but alot of us think he was poorly served by the scripts on at least two of his movies (TND & DAD).
Brosnan played Bond one way. Moore played it another. Dalton a different way. Same for Lazenby. And they were all trying to avoid comparisons with Connery. But they were all Bond. And they all made me smile. I have a very strong suspicion that Craig will do the same. Whatever happens it's Bond. James Bond.
@merseytart
Agreed.
I can genuinely agree with all this. Well said. I definately have my preferences, but no actor so far has been a complete disaster in the role, IMO. Not even Peter Sellers.
Can't believe you went there, ben. Them's fightin' words...X-(
Lazenby forever!!!
Fair enough, Ben. And I suppose I did over-react by jumping to the gun as soon as I saw a back-lash of negativity again with a positive review (even if the guy writes like a 6 year old and could indeed be a plant).....;)
Sorry, Tony. I get quite defensive about my Timothy.
It's not really like that though, is it? They're just films... if someone has a go at your mum; fair enough, but if they say they didn't like GoldenEye... I just can't get upset about that. At a push if they call you defective for liking them, maybe, but he didn't even do that. They're just films which some people don't like. I'm managing to live with that.
As for this bloke being a plant; he could be, yes, but I see no reason to think he is. Or isn't, whichever point of view you prefer. If you're calling him a plant just because it's positive... well, that's just silly. And if it's because they aren't many other reviews on the net, well how many usually appear for test screenings on the net? I don't remember seeing much more than one on AICN or any of those sites for new movies: not many people actually write reviews on the net and very few people actually get into test screenings. The likelyhood of a high percentage of those being the kind of people who write net reviews is pretty low. That gossip monkey chap that MBE linked to said he'd spoken to a couple, so we know these test screenings are happening (unless he made it all up too! Who ya gonna trust?). It all seems pretty believable to me and if he is a plant, so what? All he's done is smoke out a couple of people who go looking to be offended whenever someone says the word 'Brosnan'.
It's a simile actually
But I was just extending it; why would you be upset because someone doesn't like something you do or vice versa? They're not passing judgement on you personally.
Fair enough, I can see that.
I don't really buy that, though. I used to get asked a lot to attend these things on the street and anyone's invited. Not just net film geeks. And most people really wouldn't go on the net and tell everyone. Maybe the AICN guys know where to hang out to catch the latest Hollywood screening, but there aren't that many huge films in the UK and I don't think you'd get that many people going online to blab about it; as that gossip monley link shows. Look how many people are on this website right now: 6. That's all. The web isn't where everyone goes.